Can Labor bring about a just society?

In his diaries, he stated that his goal was to take political power in order to give it back to communities and ordinary people. He also adopted “politically incorrect” stances including opposition to high immigration and once referred to many Australians' fixation upon the rising value of their own homes (largely caused by the increased demand for property fueled by immigration) as “the great Australian disease”.

He was resolved to begin to drastically reduce the scale of woodchipping in Tasmania and to end Australia's involvement in the Iraq war.

Standing for such decent democratic principles also eventually proved to be Mark Latham's undoing, but the fact that he came so close to succeeding, shows that even the Labor Party is not entirely impervious to the influence of genuinely uncorrupted progressive political forces.

If the Labor Party, with a leader demonstrating the elements of idealism and altruism shown by Whitlam and Latham were ever to form government, then that Labor government could indeed be the vehicle for the changes which are necessary to establish a fair and decent society and also to confront the grave environmental threats that our society and our whole planet face.

However, this seems unlikely in the current political context. If Labor is elected the two more likely scenarios are:

1. a monolithic Labor government which will govern in the interests of the wealthy as those of Keating and Hawke have done before; or
2. a less monolithic Labor government, where those opposed to pro-business policies will be prepared to take a public stance.

An anti-Howard grass roots mass movement is needed

A non-monolithic Labor government is more likely if a popular grass-roots movement in favour of progressive change is brought into existence.

Such a mass movement should be unambiguously in favour of the election of Federal Labor as the only feasible alternative to the continued rule of John Howard's unaccountable, anti-democratic and morally bankrupt government.

This should not preclude it from being strongly and openly critical of Labor's poor policy decisions: support for woodchipping and the pulp mill in Tasmania, support for uranium mining, watering down of its opposition to WorkChoices, support for high immigration and population growth and the abandonment of opposition to privatisation of Telstra.

Also, this should not preclude such a movement advocating a primary vote for independents or smaller parties which have better policies than those of either Labor or Liberal.

However, it must be unflinchingly clear on the need to use Australia's preferential voting system to preference Labor candidates ahead of any Liberal or National candidates. This will ensure that where those minor candidates or independents fail to win office their votes will flow to a Labor candidate.

If it argues such a case clearly and logically it need not drive voters back into the arms of the Liberal Party.

If, upon winning government, Federal Labor maintains its current pro-business agenda, then the grass-roots movement will be in a position to ensure that disaffection with the government will cause Labor's base of support to change its allegiance to something better, rather than to simply drift back to the Liberal Party as has happened in the past. In such circumstances, the prospect of a party such as the Greens, or else, some other party formed through the likely ensuing political struggles being able to form government, will become more achievable.

However, this scenario is unlikely to unfold if John Howard's Government retains office in 2007.